1981 (1) TMI 20

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... essee was to continue to remain a partner of the Engineering Corporation. The memorandum also provides that the investment and interest of the joint family in the partnership firm was equally divided between the members of the joint family after setting apart a sum of Rs. 5,000 towards provision for the future expenses of the unmarried daughter of the assessee, who was about five years old. According to the memorandum, the amount which was to be received by the members out of the amounts standing to the credit of the HUF in the partnership firm was to continue to remain invested in the said partnership and was not to he withdrawn without the, consent of the assessee. The clause dealing with the share in the profits or losses of the said par .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ame into the hands of the assessee did not really, and in fact, belong to the assessee and thus the provisions of s. 64 were ruled out. Similarly, an argument which was advanced was that the income from the partnership firm could be assessed, on the footing that the members of the erstwhile joint family constituted an association of persons or body of individuals, was also rejected. The order of the AAC having been confirmed, the following questions have been referred to the High Court under s. 256(1) at the instance of the Revenue. " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the, share income of Indramohan Sharma in the profits of the partnership firm was subject to an overriding title in favour of the other members of t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l reframed the question, that clearly indicated that, according to the Tribunal, the only question of law which is intended to be referred, was the question relating to the controversy as to whether after the partition of the joint family, the profits of the partnership firm could be excluded from the income of the assessee on the ground that those profits were subject to an overriding title in favour of the other members of the erstwhile joint family. Nothing prevented the Tribunal, if it had so wanted the question of law, with regard to the application of s. 64 of the Act, to be referred, to specifically make a reference of an additional question based on the applicability of s. 64. In any case, the question which has been referred can, b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X